Right Divider
Body part
Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit. You cannot lie to a "power" or a "force".
John 10:30 – Jesus is The Son of God
- Thread starter TrevorL
- Start date
Right Divider
Body part
- jamie the juggler, at it again.
- That verse does NOT say "the Holy Spirit of the Highest".
- He died.
- He lied to the Holy Spirit; he lied to God.
Acts 5:3-4 (AKJV/PCE)
(5:3) But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back [part] of the price of the land? (5:4) Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
It's so simple that a child can understand it, but not you.
Yes, Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit. He lied to God ... and where was God? And where was Jesus? And where was the Holy Spirit?
We are the personification of the Holy Spirit. The Father is Spirit and dwells in us. Jesus Christ is Spirit and dwells in us.
There is one body and one Spirit. There are not three Spirits for the church body, there is one Spirit for the church body.
There is one Spirit for the church body, not three.
The gospel of Grace: Then Peter started speaking: "I now truly understand that God does not show favoritism in dealing with people, but in every nation the person who fears him and does what is right is welcomed before him" (Acts 10:34-35 NET).
Paul later taught the same thing.
Whether then it was I or they, this is the way we preach and this is the way you believed (1 Corinthians 15:11 NET).
Right Divider
Body part
Another dumb question.
No, we are not. That is heretical doctrine on your part.
You do NOT understand what this means. You do NOT become God.
Zeke
Well-known member
Well, there are some who recognize a problem with that regarding Paul,
see here (Bet Emet Ministries).
Jesus taught a different gospel than Paul focusing more on the 'kingdom of heaven' in our midst, as well as one more friendly to the Jewish law and the prophets, as the gospel of Matthew relates, which may of course been biased since it was written for a Jewish audience. Paul came later and claimed to have had an 'encounter' with Jesus, but only saw a light and heard a voice, it was but a visionary experience, and then formulated his own gospel based on his own personal revelations after that, a good mix of his own Jewish background/scripture, albeit allegorically interpreted, mystery religion motifs, greek and gnostic philosophical overtones, and other elements distancing his teaching further away from Jewish law and customs. But key-note, was his boast that it was 'his' gospel, a noteworthy description...as well as the fact that he proclaimed his own apostleship,- none of the original apostles affirmed his apostleship,...Jesus already chose 12, and one was replaced by Mattias. Paul pretty much rode in on his own horse after trying to fit in with the original 12 (yet butting heads with them a lot, especially with Peter), but ended up crafting his own message palatable to the Gentiles, since most of the Jews sought to exile him.
One could argue each were operating under different dispensations, as the MAD folks do,...but others recognize this differential in the gospel messages of Jesus and Paul. It happens that even among messianic groups who use the Bible (OT & NT),...that Paul is either accepted and resolved by within some interpretational-context, or Paul is outright rejected as a true apostle of Jesus,...there are different points of view there. Paul really throws a monkey wrench into the mix
Jesus Words Only - another good study resource.
Yet the paradox melts away when the extroverted parable of the Spirit/innerman being played by Jesus among flesh Matt 11:11 is introverted in flesh by Paul's message Romans seven, seeing Jesus also stated he could do nothing of himself like Paul also stated about his first born of the spirit/mind the conduit used to receive the voice of the Father/Mother of us all Galatians 4:26.
Both stress the inner law over the outer display that pleases the eye's, and as you know prior cultures used the same motif yet used diverse players and language in place of the Hebrew Jewish marque we are imprinted with since the prior ages past. Attachment to any persona be it Paul or Jesus clouds the horizon of the message which is the more important than the actors of the allegorical theatrics, then, or now.
Last edited:
Zeke
Well-known member
It wasn't physical death, the persona is the dead-man walking in ignorance Luke 15:17 by temporal site focused on the pattern/shadow not the none observable kingdom of light that grows within Luke 17:20-21, you cling to extroverted meanings being played out in allegorical teachings, Galatians 4:20-28 should have registered in that religious soaked brain that the two siblings being spoke about deal with mans two states of mind one imprisoned/asleep/dead until freed by the Spirit, the scripture is not about secular history seeing the Kingdom of God deals with eternity/now and has no past or future like the mentality that drives this worlds religious hope which is only a stage/prop for the plan of God that all things exist by, and follow the Divine will for everyone to awake in due time.
It must seem like a dumb question to you because you don't know the answer and being such a negative person you can only respond with a negative comment. I'm not at all convinced you are able to engage in intelligent dialogue.
You said, "You do NOT become God." And this is a fairly typical viewpoint espoused by those who believe the two God persons failed to accomplish their stated objective of reproduction. Muslims also believe their supreme being is sterile and cannot produce offspring.
Right Divider
Body part
No jamie, we Christians get tired of your worn out heretical baloney.
Another stupid comment. Good work jamie.
There is ONE God jamie and He has revealed Himself in THREE persons. I don't care if you believe it or not, but that is what the Bible says.
And one Lord and one body and one Spirit and one faith and one baptism, etc.
Right Divider
Body part
I wonder if there is a point anywhere in our future..... I doubt it.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
The issue of 'personality'......
The issue of 'personality'......
Well, this is obviously a trintarian assumption, doctrinal interpretation and formulation read back into the texts and further crystallized in the making of creeds around the 3-5th centuries....heightened mostly during the Arian Controversy. The Bible can be made to say many things,....since translations and interpretations vary, as well as the fancy of 'preferred doctrinal proclivities'
- in the greater context,....it matters not whether you hold a Unitarian or Trinitarian Christology, but that you have faith in the essentials of Jesus word, the gospel of the kingdom, are regenerated by the Spirt, and strive to DO God's will. That is fundamental, the rest is supplementary.
I would say the 'personification' of the Holy Spirit was a later doctrinal development when the Trinity was being fleshed out, since there is no explicit reference anywhere in scripture that the Holy Spirit is a 'person' per se (although some passages refer to the Spirit having a 'will' or being referred to as if it was a 'person'). But if you come the scriptures with a pre-conceived Trinitarian conception, of course one may be more apt to 'personilize' the Spirit somehow, to fit the '3 persons, One God' concept. While there are few scriptures that present the Holy Spirit as if it were a person, much more speaks of such merely being God's breath, wind, life-force, power, active-influence, etc. Now we can certainly assume that God's Spirit may express the qualities and attributes of God himself, of course, and if any of these qualities are 'personal' or express a 'personality', then we could refer to the Holy Spirit as a 'person', but in more cases the Spirit of God is but the active-force or dynamic-influence of God, his holy breath and power.
Since 'God' is an infinite Being, He includes all aspects of personality or personhood, but also transcends our conception of personality and personhood. So, there are personal aspects of God as well as pre-personal, trans-personal, super-personal, non-personal and so on (other writings such as the Urantia Papers expound more on this wonderful subject here). The Infinite Spirit is not something you can just define as a 'person' or just a 'force', since the Spirit of God will naturally have the qualities and attributes of God himself, and in this way could say the Spirit is 'personal'. 'God' is personal, but 'God' is also more, since He is infinite.
Since the Spirit of God, is 'God'....if you lie against the Spirit, or grieve the Spirit, you are doing such to God, since God and His Spirit are indivisible. But there is no dogmatic necessity to read these passages in a way that assumes this proves the Spirit is a 'person' (a seperate individualized person within a Godhead), since 'God' is already a divine personality (and more) and His Spirit will express his personality more or less. - If you assume different personalities in a Godhead, you are accepting that God has multiple personalities. - we see in passages as well that God's Spirit can be differentiated into 7 aspects or expressive characteristics, the 7 Spirits of God....so we admit there is plurality in the divine unity. I grant the orthodox conception a plus on this point, but a 'negative' when it makes its formula a 'dogma'. On that note, the Trinity is already so above the finite heads of mortals, that its mystery may never be comprehended thru-out eternity. Still,....God is One, no matter his multiple personalities or how vast his spirit-offsprings are thru-out a most wonderful hierarchy, and a cosmos with worlds without end.
As liberal and eclectic I am in my own Christology and spirituality, if I in a service or prayer say "Holy Spirit have your way",...I'm certainly addressing, invoking the Spirit of God, understanding and identifying God's Spirit as God himself of course, realizing that the Spirit of God includes all aspects of His personality (even if one assumes the HS has his own distinct personality from the Father and the Son), as well as being the active dynamic power, the 'agency' thru which God is working. I can understand such in a Unitarian, Modalist or Trinitarian way (or some other seg-way),....no matter,...its all 'God' working thru his 'Spirit', in the name of Jesus, thru the power of His Word. So while you can contextualize this within a trinitarian framework (or not),...God is still ever ONE,....no matter how many personalities or ministering spirits are at work doing God's will at any point in space or time. 'God' is ever one, no matter how many different spirits or personalities are all serving Him - no need for mental grid-lock here, or dogmatism on the matter, since most differences are merely 'conceptual' anyways, and dont affect 'God' in any way, except some ways may be more or less beneficial in the WAY that we relate to and allow God to work in our midst. You cannot limit the infinite, but can have a rational theology philosophically liberal enough to let God be God :thumb:
The issue of 'personality'......
Well, this is obviously a trintarian assumption, doctrinal interpretation and formulation read back into the texts and further crystallized in the making of creeds around the 3-5th centuries....heightened mostly during the Arian Controversy. The Bible can be made to say many things,....since translations and interpretations vary, as well as the fancy of 'preferred doctrinal proclivities'
- in the greater context,....it matters not whether you hold a Unitarian or Trinitarian Christology, but that you have faith in the essentials of Jesus word, the gospel of the kingdom, are regenerated by the Spirt, and strive to DO God's will. That is fundamental, the rest is supplementary. I would say the 'personification' of the Holy Spirit was a later doctrinal development when the Trinity was being fleshed out, since there is no explicit reference anywhere in scripture that the Holy Spirit is a 'person' per se (although some passages refer to the Spirit having a 'will' or being referred to as if it was a 'person'). But if you come the scriptures with a pre-conceived Trinitarian conception, of course one may be more apt to 'personilize' the Spirit somehow, to fit the '3 persons, One God' concept. While there are few scriptures that present the Holy Spirit as if it were a person, much more speaks of such merely being God's breath, wind, life-force, power, active-influence, etc. Now we can certainly assume that God's Spirit may express the qualities and attributes of God himself, of course, and if any of these qualities are 'personal' or express a 'personality', then we could refer to the Holy Spirit as a 'person', but in more cases the Spirit of God is but the active-force or dynamic-influence of God, his holy breath and power.
Since 'God' is an infinite Being, He includes all aspects of personality or personhood, but also transcends our conception of personality and personhood. So, there are personal aspects of God as well as pre-personal, trans-personal, super-personal, non-personal and so on (other writings such as the Urantia Papers expound more on this wonderful subject here). The Infinite Spirit is not something you can just define as a 'person' or just a 'force', since the Spirit of God will naturally have the qualities and attributes of God himself, and in this way could say the Spirit is 'personal'. 'God' is personal, but 'God' is also more, since He is infinite.
Since the Spirit of God, is 'God'....if you lie against the Spirit, or grieve the Spirit, you are doing such to God, since God and His Spirit are indivisible. But there is no dogmatic necessity to read these passages in a way that assumes this proves the Spirit is a 'person' (a seperate individualized person within a Godhead), since 'God' is already a divine personality (and more) and His Spirit will express his personality more or less. - If you assume different personalities in a Godhead, you are accepting that God has multiple personalities. - we see in passages as well that God's Spirit can be differentiated into 7 aspects or expressive characteristics, the 7 Spirits of God....so we admit there is plurality in the divine unity. I grant the orthodox conception a plus on this point, but a 'negative' when it makes its formula a 'dogma'. On that note, the Trinity is already so above the finite heads of mortals, that its mystery may never be comprehended thru-out eternity. Still,....God is One, no matter his multiple personalities or how vast his spirit-offsprings are thru-out a most wonderful hierarchy, and a cosmos with worlds without end.
As liberal and eclectic I am in my own Christology and spirituality, if I in a service or prayer say "Holy Spirit have your way",...I'm certainly addressing, invoking the Spirit of God, understanding and identifying God's Spirit as God himself of course, realizing that the Spirit of God includes all aspects of His personality (even if one assumes the HS has his own distinct personality from the Father and the Son), as well as being the active dynamic power, the 'agency' thru which God is working. I can understand such in a Unitarian, Modalist or Trinitarian way (or some other seg-way),....no matter,...its all 'God' working thru his 'Spirit', in the name of Jesus, thru the power of His Word. So while you can contextualize this within a trinitarian framework (or not),...God is still ever ONE,....no matter how many personalities or ministering spirits are at work doing God's will at any point in space or time. 'God' is ever one, no matter how many different spirits or personalities are all serving Him
- no need for mental grid-lock here, or dogmatism on the matter, since most differences are merely 'conceptual' anyways, and dont affect 'God' in any way, except some ways may be more or less beneficial in the WAY that we relate to and allow God to work in our midst. You cannot limit the infinite, but can have a rational theology philosophically liberal enough to let God be God :thumb:
Last edited:
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Did Thomas identify Jesus as God?
Did Thomas identify Jesus as God?
I think you and other Trinitarians ought to interpret this verse within its proper context, to see your just superimposing a Trinitarian interpretation here. Did Thomas really identify Jesus as 'God'? If you look at the entire chapter 20, you'll notice just earlier when Mary met the risen Jesus and recognized him she exclaimed - "“Rabboni!” (which is to say, Teacher). - notice there is no proclamation of his deityhood. In response Jesus said -
Later after Thomas sees Jesus in vs. 28 he exclaims "my lord and my god!",....John writes as the final passage in his record -
30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
Notice that a clear distinction is always made between Jesus and the invisible Father-God, which Jesus refers to our God AND his God. Only the One Eternal-Infinite-Deity Father-God....is truly God....and that God is incorporeal. When Thomas proclaimed "my lord and my god",...such was an 'idiom' or 'phrase' of great surprise and adulation, it was not a dogmatic affirmation or proclamation of Jesus being 'God', for to Thomas an orthodox Jew there was only one God, the Father...and Jesus was his Son and Messiah. Such an exclamation was two-fold, such as "my Lord Jesus and my God (the Father)". Remember, to see the Son was to see the Father, so Thomas was praising both the Lordship of Jesus and the glory of God the Father, two persons in one proclamation - this is one way to interpret the passage. - AND I might add, its wholly faithful to the context John always affirms eternal life is in believing in the SON of God, and the God who sent him into the world. Its always a dual-testimony of God and his word(logos), the two bearing witness to each other, for to see the Son IS to see the Father as well! This does not make Jesus the Father(God).
Brother below gives a good explanation below -
Did Thomas identify Jesus as God?
I think you and other Trinitarians ought to interpret this verse within its proper context, to see your just superimposing a Trinitarian interpretation here. Did Thomas really identify Jesus as 'God'? If you look at the entire chapter 20, you'll notice just earlier when Mary met the risen Jesus and recognized him she exclaimed - "“Rabboni!” (which is to say, Teacher). - notice there is no proclamation of his deityhood. In response Jesus said -
Later after Thomas sees Jesus in vs. 28 he exclaims "my lord and my god!",....John writes as the final passage in his record -
30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
Notice that a clear distinction is always made between Jesus and the invisible Father-God, which Jesus refers to our God AND his God. Only the One Eternal-Infinite-Deity Father-God....is truly God....and that God is incorporeal. When Thomas proclaimed "my lord and my god",...such was an 'idiom' or 'phrase' of great surprise and adulation, it was not a dogmatic affirmation or proclamation of Jesus being 'God', for to Thomas an orthodox Jew there was only one God, the Father...and Jesus was his Son and Messiah. Such an exclamation was two-fold, such as "my Lord Jesus and my God (the Father)". Remember, to see the Son was to see the Father, so Thomas was praising both the Lordship of Jesus and the glory of God the Father, two persons in one proclamation
- this is one way to interpret the passage. - AND I might add, its wholly faithful to the context John always affirms eternal life is in believing in the SON of God, and the God who sent him into the world. Its always a dual-testimony of God and his word(logos), the two bearing witness to each other, for to see the Son IS to see the Father as well! This does not make Jesus the Father(God).Brother below gives a good explanation below -
If a human father has a son, the son won't be the father but he will be human.
When God the Father had a Son the Son wasn't the Father but the Son was born of the Spirit.
Jesus taught those who are born of the Spirit are Spirit.
The two God persons had a discussion one time and decided they would make a family of their kind, the God kind.
And voila.
When God the Father had a Son the Son wasn't the Father but the Son was born of the Spirit.
Jesus taught those who are born of the Spirit are Spirit.
The two God persons had a discussion one time and decided they would make a family of their kind, the God kind.
And voila.
I think you and other Trinitarians ought to interpret this verse within its proper context, to see your just superimposing a Trinitarian interpretation here. Did Thomas really identify Jesus as 'God'? If you look at the entire chapter 20, you'll notice just earlier when Mary met the risen Jesus and recognized him she exclaimed - "“Rabboni!” (which is to say, Teacher). - notice there is no proclamation of his deityhood. In response Jesus said -
Later after Thomas sees Jesus in vs. 28 he exclaims "my lord and my god!",....John writes as the final passage in his record -
30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
Notice that a clear distinction is always made between Jesus and the invisible Father-God, which Jesus refers to our God AND his God. Only the One Eternal-Infinite-Deity Father-God....is truly God....and that God is incorporeal. When Thomas proclaimed "my lord and my god",...such was an 'idiom' or 'phrase' of great surprise and adulation, it was not a dogmatic affirmation or proclamation of Jesus being 'God', for to Thomas an orthodox Jew there was only one God, the Father...and Jesus was his Son and Messiah. Such an exclamation was two-fold, such as "my Lord Jesus and my God (the Father)". Remember, to see the Son was to see the Father, so Thomas was praising both the Lordship of Jesus and the glory of God the Father, two persons in one proclamation
Brother below gives a good explanation below -
excellent analysis. thank you
but they will continually ignore. and repeat the same, out of context interpretation.
Ben Masada
New member
No Jamie, please keep away with the legends! You know this is not true!. If you are trying to go for attention, try different ways. Your [proposal is suggestive of Greek Mythology.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Yes, Thomas really identified the Lord Jesus as God:
"And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God" (Jn.20:28).
If the Lord Jesus is not God then certainly He would have corrected Thomas. But He did no such thing. Instead, what He said to Thomas in reply confirms that what Thomas said was correct:
"Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed" (Jn.20:29).
Once Thomas saw the Lord Jesus in His resurrected body then any doubt that he might have had about the Lord Jesus being God vanished. And by the Lord's response we can know for certain that what Thomas said was right, that the Lord Jesus is God.
In order to have a proper understanding of what the Lord Jesus said there we must look at this passage:
"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).
Here we see that the Lord Jesus was made in the likeness of men. In fact, He was made like us in every way (Heb.2:17). And every "man" has a God:
"The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all" (Ps.103:19).
The LORD is in total control over the universe which He created, so therefore He rules over it all and that includes all "men." The Lord Jesus subjected Himself to everything in regard to being a "man," including things like hunger, exhaustion, sorrow and all the other emotions experienced by man.
And since the Lord Jesus was made like a man in all things that means that in His role as "man" He has a God. That fact cannot be disputed!
When we consider Philippians 2:5-7 again we can see that before the Lord Jesus took on the form of man that He was in the form of God.
The Greek word translated "form" means "the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external appearance" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).
So since the Lord Jesus was in the form of God then the verse is speaking about how He will appear to the inhabitants of heaven:
"And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads" (Rev.22:3-4).
The Lord Jesus couldn't appear that way to those inhabitants unless He is God. And from this verse which describes the ONE sitting on the throne we can know that the Lord Jesus is God:
"And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son" (Rev.21:5-7).
Since Jehovah God is the only one who can be identified as the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, then we can know that the following words of the Lord Jesus identify Him as God:
"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last" (Rev.22:12-13).
We can know for certain that there are the words of the Lord Jesus because later we can see that the Apostle John knew that those words were spoken by the Lord Jesus. He said:
"He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus" (Rev.22:20).
What more evidence do you need before you will recognize the truth that the Lord Jesus is Jehovah God?
Last edited:
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
I never said it was "physical" death. Where did you ever get such an idea?
Again, here is what I said:
The sentence upon sin is death: "For the wages of sin is death" (Ro. 6: 23). When a man sins he becomes spiritually dead. "Death" does not mean ceasing to exist, but instead means a "separation". Physical death is the separation of a man's soul from his physical body. Spiritual death is the separation of spirit of God from a man's soul.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Sonship we affirm, there is one only Universal God and Father of all.........
Sonship we affirm, there is one only Universal God and Father of all.........
You're welcome :thumb: - Its always great to illuminate
Yes, if you come into this already assuming Jesus is 'God' according to the orthodox forumation of the Trinity its hard to shake...you have a mind in 'grid-lock'. A seeker of truth or even a liberal philosopher ought to at least keep an open mind to change or modify his theology by way of reason, logic, common sense, revelation, new discoveries.
My former commentary on the 'personality' of the Spirit is also important to consider. While 'God' is a divine personality, and is the creator of all existing personality/personalities,....his Spirit will have and express aspects and attributes of 'personality'....naturally. The Spirit of God as well, is the breath (inspiration) of God, as well as the dynamic force, active-power of his presence. - therefore the Spirit also has non-personal aspects to its nature and movement as it interacts with souls and creation.
Jesus is always giving honor and worship to the Father Alone (the Most High and Father of all), and only claims to be His Son, His Messenger-Prophet, His Messiah, accepting titles of the Son of Man & Son of God. 'Son' is a key word here. The Father Alone has primacy in all worlds, while all the Son has is because He is His Son, so he inherits his Father's glory and honor (and certain powers/provisions), but 'God' forever remains the 'Head' of Christ. Here we would respect the divine hierarchy and laws of inheritance,...for all things and beings are subordinate to the Father, even the Son. This purely Unitarian view is logical and rational. (not that I always take a Vulcan approach to theology )
~*~*~
There are other views of Christology I like to explore and expand on quite "out there" and unorthodox,...but these presentations are given to challenge the dogmatic rigidity of orthodox Trinity belief (especially the apologists fighting to defend the divinity of Jesus), for there are quite a few Trinitarians that have become Unitarians, after much research and an awakening that such a 'dogma' was just not only wrong in their newfound understanding, but unnecessary.
Sonship we affirm, there is one only Universal God and Father of all.........
excellent analysis. thank you
but they will continually ignore. and repeat the same, out of context interpretation.
You're welcome :thumb: - Its always great to illuminate
Yes, if you come into this already assuming Jesus is 'God' according to the orthodox forumation of the Trinity its hard to shake...you have a mind in 'grid-lock'. A seeker of truth or even a liberal philosopher ought to at least keep an open mind to change or modify his theology by way of reason, logic, common sense, revelation, new discoveries.
My former commentary on the 'personality' of the Spirit is also important to consider. While 'God' is a divine personality, and is the creator of all existing personality/personalities,....his Spirit will have and express aspects and attributes of 'personality'....naturally. The Spirit of God as well, is the breath (inspiration) of God, as well as the dynamic force, active-power of his presence. - therefore the Spirit also has non-personal aspects to its nature and movement as it interacts with souls and creation.
Jesus is always giving honor and worship to the Father Alone (the Most High and Father of all), and only claims to be His Son, His Messenger-Prophet, His Messiah, accepting titles of the Son of Man & Son of God. 'Son' is a key word here. The Father Alone has primacy in all worlds, while all the Son has is because He is His Son, so he inherits his Father's glory and honor (and certain powers/provisions), but 'God' forever remains the 'Head' of Christ. Here we would respect the divine hierarchy and laws of inheritance,...for all things and beings are subordinate to the Father, even the Son. This purely Unitarian view is logical and rational. (not that I always take a Vulcan approach to theology
)~*~*~
There are other views of Christology I like to explore and expand on quite "out there" and unorthodox,...but these presentations are given to challenge the dogmatic rigidity of orthodox Trinity belief (especially the apologists fighting to defend the divinity of Jesus), for there are quite a few Trinitarians that have become Unitarians, after much research and an awakening that such a 'dogma' was just not only wrong in their newfound understanding, but unnecessary.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
John 20:28 is no proof of anything.................
John 20:28 is no proof of anything.................
Brother Kel did a good job in the previous video I shared explaining this. A few other reminders, - the above is an 'exclamation' made by Thomas in his great surprise of Jesus actually being raised from the dead, - he is witnessing his risen lord and the power of 'God' at once,...his exclamation would naturally include BOTH Jesus and the Father in his 'exclamation'. In other words he could have referred to Jesus 'my lord',....then referred to the Father as 'my God'....so this entire statement "my lord and my God" refers to 2 persons. Remember,....the Jesus is in the Father, and the Father is in Jesus. To behold Jesus is to behold God. Thomas a true Jew would never refer to Jesus as YHWH since YHWH is an incorporeal Being (invisible, infinite). However, since to behold Jesus, especially in his resurrected body, would be to truly behold God! So saying "my lord and my god" is appropriate, as long as we understanding who Thomas is relating to. (in this case, Jesus and the Father). There is no warrant here to assume Jesus is claiming to be YHWH here, or proof. It is but Thomas personal exclamation of being overwhelmed by the glory of God.
Jesus did not have to correct Thomas about anything, since he recognized what Thomas meant and who he was referring to in his exclamation. It was not a dogmatic statement,...he was overwhelmed/startled at the sight of the risen Jesus! Most anyone else would have also said something like "oh my lord"....or "oh my god". And do notice,...earlier Mary recognized him and called him 'Rabbi (Teacher)',...she did not call him God,...and John wrote a few verses after: "but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name." - If the writer of this chatper thought it so important that a belief that Jesus was God be emphasized, he would have written such in final statement, but he did NOT. Remember, the key reference is Son of God, having faith in the name of the Son of God. Having faith in the Son is to have faith in the Father, and vice versa....since once cannot exclude the other. They are one.
The problem is, there is no proof that Thomas believed Jesus was YHWH previous to this event, during or after. His statement was an 'exclamation', not a dogmatic statement. When he saw the proof of Jesus being alive, he affirmed his lordship and the divine power (God's) that raised him. We can read more into that, but its unnecessary.
Bishop Bill Williams has more insights -
<------ snip -------->
JS, I'm not addressing the rest of your post or passages at this time, but focusing on John 20:28. Do note there are thousands of Biblical Unitarians who are doing wonderful without believing Jesus is YHWH himself, and living fruitful Christians lives. Just in case you forget
This is one perspective of Christology within Christendom, along with Trinitarianism, plus other perspectives that are wonderful or interesting. What later became crystallized in orthodox creeds by the church-state powers at Rome about the Trinity does not necessarily represent the 'one and only' viewpoint or teaching of the early church, but those of the socio-political establishment who were in bed with the 'church', so we cannot be sure that all motives were pure within such alliances. If Arius and later Arianism would have won the day among the power elite in the 4th century, perhaps traditional Christian doctrine would have been different and Trinitarianism would have been a heresy. Imagine that
John 20:28 is no proof of anything.................
Brother Kel did a good job in the previous video I shared explaining this. A few other reminders, - the above is an 'exclamation' made by Thomas in his great surprise of Jesus actually being raised from the dead, - he is witnessing his risen lord and the power of 'God' at once,...his exclamation would naturally include BOTH Jesus and the Father in his 'exclamation'. In other words he could have referred to Jesus 'my lord',....then referred to the Father as 'my God'....so this entire statement "my lord and my God" refers to 2 persons. Remember,....the Jesus is in the Father, and the Father is in Jesus. To behold Jesus is to behold God. Thomas a true Jew would never refer to Jesus as YHWH since YHWH is an incorporeal Being (invisible, infinite). However, since to behold Jesus, especially in his resurrected body, would be to truly behold God! So saying "my lord and my god" is appropriate, as long as we understanding who Thomas is relating to. (in this case, Jesus and the Father). There is no warrant here to assume Jesus is claiming to be YHWH here, or proof. It is but Thomas personal exclamation of being overwhelmed by the glory of God.
Jesus did not have to correct Thomas about anything, since he recognized what Thomas meant and who he was referring to in his exclamation. It was not a dogmatic statement,...he was overwhelmed/startled at the sight of the risen Jesus! Most anyone else would have also said something like "oh my lord"....or "oh my god". And do notice,...earlier Mary recognized him and called him 'Rabbi (Teacher)',...she did not call him God,...and John wrote a few verses after: "but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name." - If the writer of this chatper thought it so important that a belief that Jesus was God be emphasized, he would have written such in final statement, but he did NOT. Remember, the key reference is Son of God, having faith in the name of the Son of God. Having faith in the Son is to have faith in the Father, and vice versa....since once cannot exclude the other. They are one.
The problem is, there is no proof that Thomas believed Jesus was YHWH previous to this event, during or after. His statement was an 'exclamation', not a dogmatic statement. When he saw the proof of Jesus being alive, he affirmed his lordship and the divine power (God's) that raised him. We can read more into that, but its unnecessary.
Bishop Bill Williams has more insights -
<------ snip -------->
JS, I'm not addressing the rest of your post or passages at this time, but focusing on John 20:28. Do note there are thousands of Biblical Unitarians who are doing wonderful without believing Jesus is YHWH himself, and living fruitful Christians lives. Just in case you forget
This is one perspective of Christology within Christendom, along with Trinitarianism, plus other perspectives that are wonderful or interesting. What later became crystallized in orthodox creeds by the church-state powers at Rome about the Trinity does not necessarily represent the 'one and only' viewpoint or teaching of the early church, but those of the socio-political establishment who were in bed with the 'church', so we cannot be sure that all motives were pure within such alliances. If Arius and later Arianism would have won the day among the power elite in the 4th century, perhaps traditional Christian doctrine would have been different and Trinitarianism would have been a heresy. Imagine that
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
I can understand why you do not want to address this passage and my remarks on it:
"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).
When we look at this verse we can see that the Lord Jesus is in the "form" of God.
The Greek word translated "form" means "the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external appearance" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).
So since the Lord Jesus was in the form of God then the verse is speaking about how He will appear to the inhabitants of heaven:
"And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads" (Rev.22:3-4).
The Lord Jesus couldn't appear that way to those inhabitants unless He is God. And from this verse which describes the ONE sitting on the throne we can know that the Lord Jesus is God:
"And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son" (Rev.21:5-7).
Since Jehovah God is the only one who can be identified as the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, then we can know that the following words of the Lord Jesus identify Him as God:
"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last" (Rev.22:12-13).
We can know for certain that there are the words of the Lord Jesus because later we can see that the Apostle John knew that those words were spoken by the Lord Jesus. He said:
"He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus" (Rev.22:20).
What more evidence do you need before you will recognize the truth that the Lord Jesus is Jehovah God?
Last edited: